Will KPop companies ditch the "Standard Contract" and return to the age of "Slavery Contract"?

Whatever opinion you might have on JYJ, it cannot be denied that they fought to establish their rights, however the merit on their cases.

Because of their struggle, the "Standard Contract" was 'suggested' by the Government on 2009 .

Its chief tenets included these two very important clauses

1. The 'Standard" length of an artist to the company was seven years, 84 months. (That could be extended in case of the member's military service, medical conditions and other situations caused by the artists.)

2. The companies should not interfere with the personal conduct of the artists unless that interfered with their ability to perform (i.e. get arrested, etc).

The companies didn't like it. When JYJ broke the contract it was 13 years long, and Yoona had a LIFETIME contract with SM. Other acts were run in a similar way and it was very common for idol members to not collect anything after the contract was usually ended unilaterally by the company.

The companies didn't like that from the start, but since the government showed a 'guideline' the courts tended to use the 'Standard Contract" as the standard to judge the legality of a contract , and although there were quite a few abuses, as we have seen in Chuu's case the Standard Contract had become the legal basis for the idol members to fight the abuses of the company.

The Fifty Fifty case , however you see it, has changed the opinion the Koreans have on the companies.

With BlackPink's contract renewal status not clear even now, and with KPop acts lasting longer because of overseas activities, companies want to extend their basic contract years to something far longer than 7 years, since if an act lasted more than 7 years that means it now has a steady foreign following.

In addition they want to make sure their ability to pressure the idols are legally affirmed, to prevent cases like Chuu or Fifty Fifty.

These changes would be very favorable for the companies and very unfavorable towards the idols, but a lot of Koreans , buoyed by the Atrakt owner's blatant media play, are now supporting the companies.

The companies want to restore the "Slave Contract", where the companies would take most of the artists' income and would leave them with nothing after they are no longer marketable, and artists no longer allowed to sue their companies.

I personally think the companies will win, because of Korea's long tradition of landowner/slave mentality. Korea legally maintained slaves until 1894, something not too many people know about, and unofficially such relationship existed until 1950s.

The companies will force the "Slave Contracts", although whether the foreign members will bite them is another matter.

Quote from oneinamiyeon

It was JHJ who initiated the one-sided trial in the court of public opinion. One thing that I couldn't figure out is why take this nuclear option if 50/50 has no case instead of simply getting it dismissed in court. It would be interesting to find out who he sought the counsel of in the quiet period prior to launching his offensive.

But after seeing some of the industry professional organizations who are known to oppose the LSG Act chime in, leak certain insider information, and seeing the disproportionate media spotlight given to the case, there are clearly forces at play that make this case no longer just a simple label dispute.

There was a comment left on a youtube video over a month ago that prognosticated that even beyond the mobilization of the Kpop industrial complex, this would get political:

They say politics is downstream from culture. Once you've laid the groundwork of winning over public opinion through manufactured consent, a big part the of battle has already been won.

Display More

As we have seen in the circus surrounding the military service of BTS, the politicians don't really understand the KPop world too much and they tend to see this as a labor dispute.

So the attempt of companies to mobilize politicians will probably backfire. The politicians will simply consume this issue without resolving anything.

Quote from tetetete

This is sad that fifty fifty case might end up having the opposite effect on idol contracts

It might, but it will make foreign wannabes avoid Korea, and some bigger companies will raise idols from their foreign subsidiaries, not subject to Korean laws

Quote from 1RL257

Yeah this definitely has gone political, what confuses me is one of the statement of the politician who asked the Ministry of Culture if they knew about the case happening.

"On 25 Aug at the plenary session, Representative Lee Yong asked Park Bo-gyoon, Minister of Culture, Sports, Tourism, if he was aware of the Fifty Fifty controversy. Minister Park said that it was inappropriate to discuss specific details but that he was watching the situation through a lens of fairness. Lee said that Fifty Fifty was selected for music business that Disney invested in but the contract was cancelled due to this controversy and that it was a loss of Korea."

So suddenly Disney is supposedly also involved and interested with the group? lol

Although this came from twitter, so I don't know if it's true or what.

Display More

He is a former athlete who actually has little power. (Korea has a system where the ruling parties assign some seats to represent non-politicians in the congress)

The minister answered the politician in a boilerplate way but it is unlikely that the minister will do anything about it.

Quote from BEG4DAWIN

You do love to crate fairy tails in your head don't you.

It is actually being talked in Korea

Quote from selfmate

isn't a question between kpop companies and the trainees (debutees) (or rather their parents since like 99% of them are underage)

if a contract states 7 years vs 13 years or even 20 years etc etc shouldn't that be a consideration whether to sign the damn contract or not...if the idol doesn't want to sign it then don't??? like no one is forcing them to right? but after you sign it you are bound by the terms of it (unless there is a breach or something)

In the old days everyone did that so there were really no choice to get have a debut

Yoona and the late Sulli had lifetime contracts , for example, with SM. And in the case of Sulli she was tied to SM to the day she died. SM refused to release her despite of all the issues she had.

They want to bring such system back, to pay little to idols and pocket even more

Quote from BEG4DAWIN

Fans are in favor of one company, not all companies.

Actually it is for all companies since Jeon represents the old style owners

Quote from selfmate

which is a bad contract that no idol should ever sign!!!

I mean personally I wouldn't and if such lifetime contracts were presented to me then I just wouldn't sign it

do you have any information pertaining to said lifetime contracts they would be interesting to read

When JYJ bolted out they were complaining for the 13 year contract, which is basically for the idol's entire career

And Yoona is still stuck at SM despite of it now being part of Kakao (and Sunny left). If Sulli were there she would still be part of it, although Lee Jieun might have asked the owners of Kakao M to transfer S to Edam.

Quote from sonemariam

I think Yoona is still in SM because they always promote her well. I think her contract has always been different seeing how she is still thriving at what she signed up to do even before debuting as Snsd. Obviously, there are always issues that we don't and can't know about but Yoona always does what she wants. For her, it was always allowed to miss Snsd work for her solo work.

The life contract sucks though. If it was really a thing then it's good that it was ended.

Which they want to revive if they can.